N.Muraleedharan v. Mrs.K.Valsakumari

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2015/17TH CHAITHRA, 1937 Con.Case(C).No. 165 of 2014 (S) ------------------------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.15208/2011, DATED 29-07-2013 ------------------- PETITIONER(S)/SECOND PETITIONER :

------------------------------------------------------------ N.MURALEEDHARAN, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.NEELAKANTAN NAIR, ASSISTANT ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KEERAMPARA, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY DR.K.P.SATHEESAN (SENIOR ADVOCATE) ADVS. SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR SRI.S.VIBHEESHANAN RESPONDENT(S)/2ND RESPONDENT :

---------------------------------------------------------

1. MRS.K.VALSAKUMARI, AGED 54 YEARS, W/O.DR.N.SASI, CHIEF ENGINEER (H.R.M), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.

* ADDITIONAL R2 IMPLEADED

2. MR.P.P.VARGHESE, AGED 56 YEARS, (FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, GENERATION CIRCLE, KOTHAMANGALAM- 686 666.

* ADDITIONAL R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 28.05.2014 IN I.A.NO.127/2014.

BY ADV. SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Msd.

Con.Case(C).No. 165 of 2014 (S) ------------------------------------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :

ANNEXURE I:

CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.07.2013 IN W.P.(C).NO.15208/2011.

ANNEXURE II:

TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EB1(A)/AE (ELE.) WP15208/2011/REGN./2013 DATED 26.11.2013.

ANNEXURE III:

TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, GENERATION CIRCLE, KOTHAMANGALAM, DATED 03.01.2014.

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :

NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J * * * * * * * * * * * * Cont.Case No.165 of 2014 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of April 2015

J U D G M E N T

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the directions issued by this Court have substantially been complied with. Accordingly, petitioner does not want to proceed with the contempt case. Accordingly, contempt case is dropped.

(sd/-) (A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE) jsr